The "Otago Daily Times" in a Leading Article on 2nd July, 1880, Says :

"There are mutterings that threaten the whole fabric of State education on the score of expense, and it is within the range of possibility that those who take this view of our present system may hereafter be willing to coalesce with those who are dissatisfied because they regard the State system not merely as secular, but as absolutely irreligious and immoral, in bringing about such a modified system of 'payments by results" as we have several times sketched in these columns—a system which would leave greater freedom to all who are anxious to combine religious with secular instruction by making the State the equal distributor of all public grants for secular instruction only, and would allow each separate educational organization to give what religious instruction it pleased. This would be an absolutely impartial system; but, after all, the State schools would be necessary to supplement the imperfect efforts of private enterprise and religious zeal. There is just a possibility that the expense to the State might be lessened by such a course, but the unsettled point is, would not a large number of children be left without education? We do not know how that is to be answered, except by actual experience. The only advice we have to tender to those who believe our present State system is compatible with a reasonable amount of moral and religious instruction being imparted to the children is, to carefully follow the working of the new regulations in New South Wales. If our neighbours succeed, contrary to our expectations, in solving the difficult problem, it will be worth while to consider the propriety of following in their footsteps. If they fail, as we fear they will, it will be useless for us to imitate their example. In that case there will be, so far as we can see, no practicable alternative between an absolutely and exclusively secular State system, and a system of payment by results."

The "Timaru Herald" in a Leading Article on 12th July, 1880, Says :—

"For one who desires to see the children of the colony trained philosophically, there are a hundred who desire them to be brought up religiously. The people of this country, like the parent stock, are governed in their daily life by religious ideas. Their social, page 49 and even their political institutions, recognize the existence of religion. So much is this the case, that the exclusion of religious teaching from the education of the young, if carried out as strictly as some would wish it to be, would actually constitute the rising generation a class of foreigners, as far as their, habits of thought are concerned.

"It is under these circumstances that Sir William Fox, and those who think with him, are endeavouring to engraft on the noble system of public education now firmly established in New Zealand, a provision which will combine religious teaching with the ordinary secular instruction of schools. They will be met at the outset by a host of difficulties, which have nothing to do with the fundamental question of whether or not it is desirable to educate the people in religious principles. The chief of these is the difficulty of reconciling the differences of the various religious denominations. The most ardent advocates of religion must discern a broad distinction between religious education and sectarian education; and the weightiest task that devolves on those who have taken up this subject, is that of devising a course which will secure the former, and yet avoid the latter."

The "Southland Times" of 10th July, 1880, in a Leading Article, Says :—

"The constitution of Britain and her Colonies is built on the Bible, and it has never been proposed formally to remove one stone of the foundation. To ask, therefore, that the school should recognize the Bible, was simply to ask that there should be consistency throughout the organizations that were the work of the State. There never had been absolute agreement on the part of members of the body politic in regard to its origin and authority, but in spite of this fact, the Bible had been nationally acknowledged in every branch of legislation. It cannot, therefore, be accepted as an argument for excluding that book from the Common Schools, that all are not agreed as to its claims and character. No argument on this score could be adduced against admission of the Bible to the schools that could not be adduced to overturn the foundations of British jurisprudence and government. If these arguments are correct, they form the best direct constitutional argument for an alteration of the Education Act, and the most conclusive answer to the bulk of objections urged against the use of the Bible in the schools. The evils of the present system are sufficiently patent. It discredits in the eyes of the children what is acknowledged by all Christendom to be the ultimate authority in morals. It deprives many of the only opportunity that can be made sure to them of becoming acquainted with the basis of the legislation of their country, legislation which they are expected to page 50 understand and obey. It leaves State teaching without the foundation on which all true education must rest. It withholds from the children much indispensable knowledge of history, and some of the finest specimens of English literature. These are grave indictments, and yet every one of them can be sustained. Beyond them as secular journalists we do not care to go. But it is fair to ask, simply in the interests of the moral and material welfare of the Colony, what harm has ever come of Bible teaching, and what else it is proposed to put in its place. It has been well tried, and wherever it has been tried, has built up the most flourishing nations on the earth. What country, &c.

"We believe that acceptance of the principle of Bible reading in the schools, and its enactment as an obligatory part of the statute, with a conscience clause, is what the country is quite ripe for, and would be the best course to pursue."